Quote:
Taking exception to the processor and other issues raised here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox
Well, the marketing angle is certainly reasonable, but we don't really know that the next iMac refresh is going to be purely cosmetic.
I think what most people here are saying is that the next iMac had damn well be more than a cosmetic upgrade. As much as Apple would like to you can't market around the facts to the majority of the people.
Quote:
It will almost certainly feature some kind of CPU boost, plus the usual upticks in ram and hard drive space, plus possible some hardware revisions we don't know about.
Which would not be good enough. In my case it would force me to not reccomend the iMac to anyone.
Quote:
Again, the value proposition for a potential buyer is a whole bunch of interrelated elements, not just "does it have the latest CPU", which I submit is fairly low on the list.
Then simply put you are wrong. The CPU is the biggest shortcoming in the iMac and I would put forth is the most important element on the list that informed shoppers use. An i7 derived or like processor is really what Snow Leopard was built for.
Except for the possibility on the lowest end machines I can't see dual core in Apples machines as being even remotely viable for leveraging SL. SL and GCD are meant to exploit highly parallel machines supporting many threads. Without quad cores and more the ability to leverage those new features is extremely limited. Frankly the development effort that went into SL indicates that Apple sees these parallel machines as it's near term future. So if you want to buy into this new world order you need to expect a minimal of 4 hardware threads.
Dave
Dave, at times, seems to be one of the few sane, balanced and reasonable non-'kool-aid' people on here at times.
He's right. It's amazing that people would side with Apple to say that the cpu isn't important...because (pick insane argument to fill in blank.)
And I do agree with Dave that the direction of Snow Leopard should be ample reason enough to warrant a quad core iMac. Or the fact that the rest of the 'sane' PC World have had consumer quad cores for how long now? And at cheap prices? And i7 class hardware that blows the mini, iMac and Mac Pro out the water for value for money.
Nice OS, sexy cases...poor value, out of date specs and bad value for the consumer. ie out of date hardware for the consumer desktop space.
Let alone the fact that i7 is a chip that clock for clock beats the snot out of the Core out of date Duo, it's equipped for the future, better performing and costs way less than the craptop parts Apple is using. Stubborn. Arrogance. Blind dogma. A lack of choice. Take yer pick.
I thought it would be inconceivable with the move to Intel that we would see hardware costing twice as much for out of date desktop parts. It's just like the PPC days again. But worse given the context of Inteldom.
Here's hoping the next iMac revision doesn't suck like that last two revisions which basically, in the words of Woody Allen, '98% of dancing is just turning up.'
Lemon Bon Bon.
